I call this June 10th Charlottesville City Council special meeting to order. The purpose of this meeting is to receive a presentation from the Charlottesville Early Learning Center workg group outlining a proposed vision for the early learning center. Uh Miss Thomas will call the roll, please. >> Councelor Viceer
>> here. >> Vice Mayor Ash >> here. >> Councelor Payne >> here. Councelor Snook >> here >> and Mayor Wade is traveling on the southern pilgrimage. >> Having a good and educational time. >> Um before I turn over the meeting to our
deputy city manager, I would like to take a brief moment of silence to recognize the fact that um we did have a member of our community pass away over over this week um uh down in one of the encampment areas by the river. So, we
know that our our police team are still doing research and finding out what's going on down there. We'll keep the community updated as we find out more. Um, but just a little brief moment of silence for that before we get started, please. >> Thank you. Um, Deputy Manager Freeze.
All right. Good afternoon, Vice Mayor, members of council. Uh, I will keep it brief. I'm just going to note that the last time you all talked about the early childhood learning center was actually in a joint meeting with the school board back in August of last summer. Um and at
that time we were presenting a design that allowed us to preserve um the existing uh gymnasium building on the Walker campus site and incorporated a proposed new building into the slope that's kind of there between the fields and the parking area. Um, in this
instance, we're going to be sharing with you three different designs, including a new one um that uh uh uh well meets many of our needs and potentially offers us a lower cost. So, with that, I'm going to go and turn this
over to Mr. Goddard uh to share where we are. >> Good evening, me members of council. Um Mike Goddard, deputy director of public works. Um as uh Mr. Freeze told you, I'm here to give you a little bit of an update on our early learning
center designs. Um so in in giving you this update, I'm going to go through a little bit of the background, a little bit of the history on kind of how we got to a decision point that we're at right now. Um so we can go ahead to the next slide. Roomie,
thank you. Um these are the existing conditions out on the Walker site. So uh those who have been following along for a while will remember that uh this project was part of the uh reconfiguration project that
we initiated uh when we decided to uh move some move the uh sixth grade or yeah the sixth grade up into the uh middle school. So we've already built our new middle school that'll open this summer. So this was kind of packaged up
with that part of that reconfiguration process meant that the prek students needed a place to go. Um so that was kind of a phase two of the project and we we designed the two buildings up to a very early schematic design phase in
concert and that was back in I think 2022. Um a lot of this was happening dur during COVID. um a lot of these meetings and and the scoping meetings that we had with the community were happening during that time. So that gives a little bit of
context for some of the decision-m um at the time. So this is the Walker site um currently administrative building on the north side of the site. Building A which is kind of the main school building, building B which is the auditorium building and building C which is the
gymnasium. And then crow there is the crow poolool which uh we've talked about decommissioning several times over the years but is still functioning uh at the present. So next slide.
Okay. So in the early iterations of this project this was the scheme that we first came up with. It's important to note that when we were talking about the project at this point in time, um there was really no perceived need to retain any of the existing buildings for any
purpose. Um we were planning to building a new early learning center. Um but we really didn't know what a building A would be used for. We figured maybe administrative uses or or something. We figure it out. Um, building B likewise,
uh, and building C certainly, you know, you don't need a gym if you don't have a school. Um, things have changed since, but, as part of that, um, we came up with a scheme that involved demolishing the, uh, gymnasium building and building on
that site and incorporating building B, which is the auditorium building, kind of renovating it. not not too different of a project from what we've done at the middle school actually. Uh a reuse and a new construction on the same site.
Um so you'll see here the front door for that project would have been uh down in the lower part of the site on Rose Hill Drive. Now you see a loop on the south side there. Um building A, as I said, stays where it is. Building B
incorporated into the new project and building C is demolished. Um, and we have no loss of parking with this project or with this approach. And it's uh we believe we still believe I think that it's about a $42.5 million uh
project. I I think there are some significant problems with that as I'll explain. So, uh we can go to the next slide. Remy, thank you. Um a few things happened immediately after
we started working through that. One of which was the FEI uh situation. So to refresh everyone's memory, we all thought that we might get FEI from the federal government uh the federal executive institute. Uh we started putting together plans for what we might
do with that site if we got it. And uh though it was ultimately unsuccessful um a lot of things were brought to light through that process. Uh needs that the schools had that we hadn't really been aware of or things that had changed a little bit in the in the years since
we'd started this design process. Um one of those was a need for a more um significant uh construction program for the school's facilities at large. Um,
it quickly became pretty apparent that the idea of removing all of those buildings from use would potentially limit our capability to uh make moves in the future. The one that I'm most concerned with is the elementary schools. Um,
the problem that we continually have with elementary schools is if we're if we're trying to renovate an elementary school, it really can't be done in the summer, right? Um, so you need a place to put students and we started to see that this was a pretty good place to do
that. So once building A was vacant, we could put students there as a swing space for any future projects we said we decided to do. Uh, the problem there though is that if we got rid of building C, the gym building, then you got a school with no gym. And we started to
think, well, you know, that doesn't make a lot of sense. we probably should um retain that building. So, we talked to our consultants via the architects. They came up with a great scheme uh the one you see here, the one we've I think most recently talked about
with you all. Um which is the terrorist approach. Uh what this does is it it moves our building up onto Gentry Lane. So, your front door is now up on on Gentry Lane. um it leaves A, B, and C
and incidentally pro untouched uh for future use. So in the background, you know, we've been doing a lot of planning work um and came up with some I think pretty strong ideas for um a program
moving forward that might renovate a lot of our schools. Um I won't go too deeply into all of that, but we've got some results from that. We've come up with an approach that um I think involves the the renovation of our high school
followed by a series of elementary projects. Um we now have potentially a path forward for funding that using uh a 1-centent sales tax. You know, this is all stuff that's happening in the background. And we've uh put together a working group to work through what that
process might look like to put a scope and scale to what those projects would be. Um, and so the more that we look at that, we see yes, we probably do want all of these buildings to be intact or something like them. Um, and so this looks like a pretty good approach. Uh,
the challenge, of course, is that, you know, if you know the site very well, you'll see that, uh, our terrace design really builds into a pretty steep hill. Um, so we're doing a lot of retaining work there. Um, it's not the cheapest
way to build a building. Uh, the terrace approach also gives us some nice access to outdoor space from all the classrooms, but that outdoor space is kind of on rooftops, which is a really uh intriguing architectural design. I became really enamored with
it, I have to say. Um, but it does come with some challenges. um not the least of which is cost for construction and some some challenges when it comes to maintainability. Um
so you know we were challenged by that but it wasn't it wasn't something that I considered a showstopper. Um and we sort of moved forward to where we got to the point of uh getting some cost numbers on that. Um
when we saw the costs for that project as you saw on the slide which seems to have magically disappeared um it's not booted from the zoom. >> It's okay. Um the cost for that project is something like $60 million which I think is more
than we all anticipated. Um and you know not being a decision maker but having some sense of where this is all headed. You know, I'll refer back to the concept of us going through the school projects and series and having quite a robust plan. You know, James and
I presented a a concept of that to you all. When was that? Last fall. >> Same same meeting in August. >> Oh, okay. So, last summer, you know, we we presented that concept. We've moved that forward in our uh working group for the schools.
And you know, as we put more shape to that, we start to see what the costs might be associated. $60 million all of a sudden seems like kind of a lot to put into this one building if there are other options.
Perfect timing. Um, so to go through some of the pluses and minuses on this approach, the B approach, the $60 million approach, um, the front door is up top. Buildings B and C are left as is. Building C needs
some waterproofing. So, to my mind, you know, why tear down a good building uh to build another building. Yeah, but this building's not perfect. It certainly has some maintenance requirements. Water comes in. We would have to do a significant waterproofing
project if we're going to continue to use it. Uh and those costs haven't really been factored into this approach. Um and then Gentry Lane would be closed to to through traffic. So we would need to close that off. Now that that lane
belongs to the school. It's not a street per se. So we we we would be within our rights to do that. But um you know for better or for worse that would have to happen. The definite negative to that though is that we would have to build a
pretty large retaining wall to widen that space so that buses could turn around there. Uh so the costs start to sort of build up. We recently got some information from our geotechnical firm that wasn't super favorable, a lot of unsuitable soils in that location, a lot
of rock. Anybody who's been paying close attention to our middle school project will know that the biggest um cost driver for overages on that project was rock removal. So, um you know, it all starts to not feel perfect, I would say.
Uh so we uh you >> sorry earlier you referenced issues with long-term maintenance like what is kind of the scale of those challenges? >> Do you mean for the for the new building
or the gym? >> I think it was in reference to the new building >> probably was. Um so the way that building is designed is with uh roof terraces for the kids to play on. So the kids are in an outside environment, but that's on the roof that's kind of
stacked uh in a terrace and terrace uh plan down the hill, right? Uh the challenge there is that all of those roofs have to be waterproofed really well. There's plants bu plants growing on a roof. You know, you have to maintain the plants, you have to maintain the roof. Every time you need
to replace the roof membranes, you have to take all that off. So it's just not the easiest thing to maintain. It's not impossible. Uh people do it all the time. Um you know there's a a big new building, a code building down at the end of the mall that has giant trees growing on the roof. So it can be done
but it comes at a cost and you know you start to weigh those costs and feel like maybe there's a better way. So, um, just as we're starting to feel a little bit uneasy about these numbers, our architects came to us with a unsolicited
but, uh, welcome plan, uh, which is scheme C. So, this is a much simpler plan. It does involve removing the existing gym. Um, so we would, it goes back to being a little bit more like the
first iteration, plan A. Um, we take out the existing gym, we replace it with a new volume, and then that little um this little section here is a new gym. So, we're taking down a gym and
replacing it with a gym, which to me at first blush felt a little bit challenging, but uh we were um we were we were told by our architects that actually the savings from not doing all the complicated stuff on the other end of the site more than
offset the cost of that additional that additional new space in the building. So, um, we believe, and this it's still very early days, of course, but we believe this is about a $51 million project. Uh, so around $10 million cheaper than
the, uh, plan B. Um, front door once again moves down to the south part of the site. We're working with a terrace scheme. Now, we don't have much of a drawing on this. This this plan is three weeks old at this point, something like that. So,
this is very fresh information, but we did want to get it in front of uh you all as soon as we could so that we could sort of develop a plan forward and not spend a lot of time going down paths that aren't going to end up being the final path. Um,
so in this scheme, buildings A and B are left as is. They're still available to us to be used as swing space in the future. Um, and then building C is demolished, but a new gym is built on the site. Crow is still available for whatever purpose we
want to use it for or none at all. That's up to the city going forward. Um, and there's no net loss of parking. So, parking is another challenge with scheme B. Uh, we don't know how to account for quite all of the parking. And though none of us really want to consider that
a decision point, it is when teachers have to get to work. So, um, this to me I I mean I'll be perfectly honest. I was really fond of scheme B. Um, it hurt me to look at this and think that maybe it
made more sense, but uh I think logical is logical and uh I can't stand in the way of that logic. So to me, I think this is a better approach. So um there are some elements of the plan that are interesting. Um, and one
thing that really caught me is it's it's not easy to see on this plan, but um, the kids on both levels have direct access to outdoor space outside of their classroom in the same way that they did in uh, in scheme B. So, um, and we can
look at a little more detail at these as we go through them one by one. So, Remy, if we can jump to the next one. So this is the existing condition again just a little bit larger. This is the scheme A. Uh as I mentioned
this kind of takes over the old um auditorium building and build a new volume onto it. And then B. So here we are with the terrace scheme and you can see a little better in this in this view how the students would walk straight out
onto their you know terrace play spaces. And then we've got a more formal play space down below. And then we've got scheme C, which um as you can see, all of these students are able to sort of access green space just out the door,
their classrooms. Um and one additional nicity of this approach is that we can keep all those big trees that are right up against the back of the existing a building. If you're familiar with the site, there are some really great old trees that have been uh important to the
site for many many years. Um probably definitely longer than the school's been there. So uh it would be nice to save those. So uh to my mind um this is a rational approach. I think this is the way we should go forward and u that would be
our recommendation. But we wanted to present it to council um to get any thoughts you all might have, answer any questions you might have. Uh we have architects from BMDO here if you have any technical questions as I'm sure you
know. I didn't draw any of this so I don't know everything about it. Uh but we have the experts who do and did. Um and I have uh Stuart Harding and Bruce White from the project management team. Uh Stuart has been managing the CMS
project very successfully and and will manage this one uh as well is managing it right now as well. So um if you have any questions for any of us, please feel free. >> Great. Thanks. Um anything you want to
add before we start talking? >> I could just note um one of our themes always tensions and trade-offs, right? And the clear and present one is around cost. And you can see one of the things that took us away
from from uh exploration of that second option was both escalating upfront cost and concern around escalating operating costs. Um so we that's that's a that's a factor in this discussion and something thinking about. But the other element of
this is both making efficient use of our existing school space and recognizing flexibility. Um Mr. got a couple times referenced um this idea that we are looking at the entire portfolio of school buildings and and thinking about
how those may need to be upgraded, re rehabilitated, renovated over time um given their age, given conditions, given changing expectations in in a modern school building. Um, and so the working group he referenced, which is made up of
both uh city staff and school staff, has been working now since I want to say December. Is that right? November. December time frame. >> Um, looking ahead, looking at the potential of of additional revenue coming in if the state um completes their budget
process. And um so these are just these are all factors as we're we're thinking about. But that flexibility at this site opens up the opportunity to completely shut down a school, do a full rehabilitation or maybe even a complete
replacement um and then reopen the school, which is a more efficient way of being able to move forward with with a with a robust um school revitalization program. So those are the things we're thinking about as we think about this site. So, but we're I welcome any questions, comments, or feedback you all
have. >> Great. Thank you very much. Would you like to start? >> Um, sure. I guess high level definitely agree the swing space is kind of non-negotiable. Um, and likewise
the whole system, every building needed either pretty fundamental rehabilitation or rebuilding. So definitely agree that thinking about cost in the context of being able to take care of the whole systems building portfolio is also critical. Um a few questions that jump
to mind with scheme B and the parking tradeoff. This is a question of just true ignorance on my part. Um on like an average day, is the utilization of the spaces on site 100%.
I would not say 100% but I would say not too far from that. Yeah, I think I think most [snorts] during most of the day most of the parking almost all of the parking will be taken. Yeah. >> Okay. Um and then
>> and I should point out that that's with just one school on the site, >> right? >> Point taken. Um, also with scheme B is kind of beyond the expected maintenance costs over time is the expectation that that
60.8 million number is likely to escalate just given the conditions. >> I I would say that it's important to point out that we're in schematic design right now. So there's a lot we don't know. We don't know about the time value of money between now and whenever.
You've heard this a hundred times from from us and others. Um, but I would say that the risk value of that proposition is higher because there's there's a much more complicated construction type and a lot more, you know, we we talk a little
bit about how the gym has trouble keeping water out right now. Um, we would be building into a similar kind of condition where we're really retaining quite a lot of earth. So I think uh our architects are much more comfortable,
our engineers are much more comfortable with uh schemes A or C just because it's less of a engineering feat to get it done. And anytime you're asking somebody to do feats, you know, there's a price attached. So
>> is it the like rock and water that's like the biggest complicating variables? >> The main a couple things. One is, yeah, we're we're really building deeply into a hillside. So that's basically a three-story building, all of which is retaining. Um, we're going to notch out
that entire building basically into that hillside and have to hold all that earth back. Then we're also going to have to notch out the hillside for the bus turnaround and hold all that earth back. And then we're building um outdoor play spaces on roofs. So a roof is a
challenging enough, you know, what's the worst thing you hear about buildings all the time? the roof always leaks, right? That's always going to be a challenge. Now, we're putting a bunch of kids on the roof and a bunch of plants and a bunch of play stuff and um and that that's a challenge. I mean, just as a
construction as a construction type, it is is more challenging. Yeah. Um and then I know in the past there's been discussions around this phase of school reconfiguration could have some substantial amount of
private investment that that's maybe open or willing to be a part of the kind of capital stack. Is that still the case or is that likely or is that just kind of an unknown at this point? I am unaware of any private money that
has been offered for this uh for this project or any of our major projects for that matter. >> Obviously, we'd be open to it if there was a way, but yeah, we we don't know of any. >> Yeah. And I I just know it's come up in community conversations. I don't know if
it was a soft or hard commitment or or what. Um and >> the only other question is there may not be an answer tonight. Um, you know, this could intersect with the 1 cent sales tax referendum, which could
still be in the um budget, the state budget. I'm not saying this would or should be our approach, but just to maintain flexibility. if we were to do that in, you know, this upcoming election cycle
to hold the referendum and that in any way kind of impacted the timing of any of this. Um, is there any way for us to before the state budget passes kind of hold the necessary public hearings so that it
could still be in the upcoming election, the referendum? Um, may not be an answer tonight. I just at least one I We've gotten emails about that idea, >> right? Yeah, that's not a question for you. That would probably be something that we'd have to take a look at
>> at this time. I mean, what time is it really? Um because the answer might change. Um right now, as you know, the state law has an 81day kind of waiting period um before we when you do one of these referendums. Um state budget, you know, would ear be going into effect on
July 1st, which I think is right on that 81 day line. So, I'm not certain. So we wouldn't be able to hold those hearing because we don't have the authority to do those sorts of things prior to that July 1st time. So I pray we might be a little bit constrained there absent some legislative action to uh correct that.
Okay. Um I said that is the the answer I've got right now sitting here. Um I haven't done the deepest of dives but that is my current understanding of it. Um and I haven't heard anything additional from the state or from our our legislative uh delegation about that. >> So fair. So maybe opportunity for
legislative advocacy on on our part reaching out to our delegate and state senator and then the idea just one idea we received from a school board member was can we even if the state budget hasn't passed can we hold those required things before that required deadline and
don't expect an answer tonight I have no idea if that's even possible or not but >> in my looking I don't think that's that's right because we simply don't have the authority to do those things yet um that's it for me Thanks. Um, councelor Pleasure.
>> Um, how many students fit in this building in scheme C? >> Uh, I believe it's between 200 and 300 depending on some some things that have yet to be determined. >> And do we think that's about where we'll be when this is finished? >> Yeah.
>> Or do we have an estimate on that yet? >> I think that's I think that's the plan uh the plan number. Yeah. And is it that the swing spaces would be completely unused when not holding students whose building is getting revised or
>> Yeah. So I should and um thank you James for kind of touching on this. I should probably flesh that out a little bit. The concept of of this building plan that we have. Um so when we met as a uh working group to determine the facility
needs for the schools, one thing that was pretty clear is that all of our elementary schools need significant work. And I kind of touched on this but then moved on about how, you know, any significant project in a school can't be done in a summer. And so we're really our hands are tied. What's that what
that means to us then is that we either have to build some kind of a temporary school village of trailers on the site or on another site or we have to find some other place for the students to be. Um this would give us the opportunity to do
a series of swing space moves. So, um, the sequence is still, I think, somewhat up for debate, but, um, I think schools is very interested in doing the high school first because of the sort of feeling that one gets from going to our beautiful new middle school that's just
about to open into a high school that hasn't been significantly renovated since 1974, right? Um, so they would like to do a couple years of that kind of work. Now, what that looks like, we're not sure yet. um is there swing space at the high
school? You know, we don't know. But the important the more pressing part is the elementary move, right? So, if we go through our elementary schools one right after the other, uh and hit each one with whatever it is that we determine they need, whether it's a major renovation, which they certainly all
need, or a tear down and rebuild, which a few probably do need or or could need. um we would need a whole school to move those students into or we have to invest huge amounts of money into these temporary situations. The temporary
situations are very costly. Um you know it it will cost us millions of dollars to buy trailers basically to house a school in. Um so the kind of flash of brilliance and you know Sam was one of the early kind of thinkers on this was
you know why not just use this school that we already have. It will be sitting empty. We have a whole school, right, with all the things you need for a school and then some really because it's been a pretty big school. So, to answer the question, um,
yes, when it's not being used for that, we don't really have a plan for it. But our, if you look at kind of the the graph of our plan, which I didn't include because this isn't really about that, but I'm sure you'll be seeing it soon. Um, when you see the graph of the plan, it's like a 16-year building
program. So, yeah, 16 years from now, I don't know what we'll do with these buildings, but, you know, I've only been here 10 years, and the whole, you know, concept of what we use schools for has changed in that time. So, um, I'll see you in 16 years and we'll figure out what to do with it,
I guess, is my answer. >> Yeah. No, that's okay. I I just didn't know if are they even big enough to handle that capacity? >> They absolutely >> Okay. >> can. Yeah. and then some because it's been one of our kind of feeder schools. You know, it's as the upper elementary school, you know, they take two grades
of all the all the different districts in the in the city. They all come together in that school. So, it's actually kind of a big school for for that use. Um, and if we have a gym still on the site, then they'll have a gymnasium to play in and all all the
conveniences. Now, it's still going to be Old Walker, but I think Old Walker is better than trailers from my perspective. Yeah, >> sure. Perfect. Thank you. Um, the my other question is, so you're saying that
the new Lacrosse grant lacrosse family grant for UVA, the 43 million early learning center, has nothing to do with our learning early learning center. Is that right? >> I'm not aware of it. I have no idea what you're talking about. >> The press release says the city is part of that. So
>> yeah, the press release said they're involved city to determine what to do with that. >> This is a grant from >> a family to the >> university early learning center to the tune of $43 million. >> No, >> no, no.
>> Not related. >> It is not related. No, they are looking to open their own center. was said. >> Yeah, the reporting said it would be about 100 kids. >> Okay.
>> Okay, that's it. Thanks. >> There's not >> I I guess you know out of all of the uncertainties, uh the the first uncertainty we would have to resolve is the financial question of how we would pay for it. But
assuming we get that figured out, do we have a sense of how long it would take from the day the shovel goes in the ground to the day that they're ready to take in a prek program? >> Uh shovel, I think, would go into the ground sometime September 2027 if we
don't delay. Uh and we would open July 2029 in that condition. >> So basically a year and a half of construction time. >> That's right. >> Okay. And if we can't get anything on the u
if we can't get anything on the ballot until uh sometime next year, then everything have to scoot back a year. Basically, >> that is not a question that I can answer from my position. Um, I don't think
that's necessarily the case if we were willing to fund it with local funds. >> Speaking strictly as a outside observer to that process, sort of >> there's currently funds um programmed towards this project within the CIP.
>> 34 million is what we have built in right now. >> Yeah. I mean, one of the wrinkles is [clears throat] if we begin the process with local funds and then we get the authority to impose the tax, it's going to be up to the general assembly as to
whether that's a permissible use to to take over the funding of the rest of the project. >> Uh I understand from talking to our our representatives that that's that's something that's very much going to be up in the air if and when it gets approved.
it's still going to be up in the air even when the budget is approved or >> Well, that's one of the things that in theory the budget if there's something in the budget that deals with it, there might be a provision in that provision itself that
answers that question. There has been a lot of debate within the the halls of of the general assembly as to whether it should be something that would be allowed to ha to to take on the
financing of a project already begun. >> Right. Right. I would say that part of um you know we've been working to that end uh indirectly ever since the first talks of you know that's kind of what spurred us
to have the working group was this conversation I think that you started actually about we need to know what we're going to spend this money on we have to have a concept for what we're telling people we're going to tax them for >> um and that's what we've been working on the benefit of that is we do have a product of that of that working group at
this point we have a scheme we have a series of projects laid out. So, you know, if this project for whatever reason can't be funded through those funds or they, you know, won't do the takeover of the the project funding for whatever reason, uh there
are other projects in the office for sure. >> Right. >> Well, lot lots of uncertainties and hopefully by the end of June it will at least some of the uncertainties will get answered whether we have a budget general assembly or not. Thank you.
Thanks. Um I have some questions as well. Um I know the programming is not the the responsibility of the design. Um but the programming will certainly be reflected by the design. Can you talk a
little bit about the layout differences between A and C and how the space the like longer L shape in Z differs from the kind of smaller clumpier
um B replacement building in A and if that does anything to the the shape of the classrooms and and space that the students will use. I'm gonna uh phone a friend and call in an expert. >> Thank you. >> This is Maria Beninsky from B&M Architects. Um she's it's I think it's
fair to say drawn a lot of this. Um both A and C and B for that matter. So she's been involved from the very beginning. Um she hopefully has an answer to that. If not, I'll just make some up. >> That's a great question. So that's the whole goal, right? That the experience
for children in this building. Um, so I think one of the the main thing is that that clumpier version has three stories, so it doesn't look so spread out on the site because we're stacking up um with square footage. So, you know, the
corridors are shorter, but there's more stairs. Um, and so I think one significant difference um, from our conversations with the schools between A and C is where we're putting our large movement spaces um, or sorry B and C. So
the the terrace scheme has the movement space for children on that uh, field level which is the lowest level of the scheme. Um, which is a that's a nice combination. Um, but another kind of key combination is your big movement space paired with your um, drop off loops.
That's an advantageous combination that we do not have in scheme B, the terrace scheme. Um, children would be uh, two flights of stairs away from their bus loop in the movement space. And that's really about sort of beginning and ending the day. It can be useful to have
a large space like that near, you know, your queuing space. Um, scheme C does have that advantage where our drop off loops are at the same level and very close to our large movement well the gym space and an additional prek specific
movement space that's going to be in that that scheme. So I think um in terms of sort of flow beginning and end of the day that's a um an important consideration. I think u between those two schemes the way the classroom experience is it would not be too
different were we able to you know with certainty um know that we can maintain adequately the rooftop terraces with plantings and things like that. So that that um terrace scheme really relies on you know commitment to spend the money
into the future to maintain the plantings and the quality of those roof spaces which um you know that's a level of maintenance that is not currently in the portfolio of the schools. So that was part of sort of the reach of that design that was already alluded to. Um
but yeah both of those schemes have direct access to outdoor play space which um is very beneficial. um and very um desired by the the educators and the leadership of the early learning center. >> Great. Thank you so much. Um this is
probably something we've been presented before, but can you remind me what's the age range for the children being ser served here? >> Sure. It's um three year olds and four year olds and that they'll they'll turn five, many of them during the the preschool year. Um right now the
four-year-old program is larger u than the three-year-old program. Um there's a desire over time to increase capacity so that they could offer every child a two-year experience um which is shown to have beneficial outcomes. And so that's
been part of um our charge to make sure wherever we're citing the building on the site to ensure that there is a way to to expand the ELC in the future and not you know build ourselves into a corner. >> Right. Thank you.
Um, and then, um, something that we've mentioned before, definitely brought it up last year a couple of times when talking about this space and the potential we have for it. Um, is whether or not we can include
housing as part of this project. And I'm, you know, you mentioned parking being considered a decision point when teachers have to get to work. and what if there's an opportunity for folks to be closer and you know we've we've also heard from the community about why aren't you only advocating for
apartments in certain areas and not others and I have been talking about this area um before and I know there's some people on schoolboard who are also interested in it so what kind of coordination or um like next steps would be required to have that kind of
seriously evaluated considered and included in a potential design. I know there's more than just the design of the space. There's operating decisions that would have to be made and financing decisions that would have to be made. But what what are the actual potential
next steps that would be required to have that as part of the discussion? >> I don't know the actual answer to that question. Um I do know that it would be challenging. Um doesn't mean it's impossible. It just means it would be
challenging. Um what I would My initial response would be that um I do think we're looking at a site that has a lot of future potential. Um like I said, 16 years from now or
whenever we finish the building program, I think there's going to be some some space, you know, a building that is tired and uh I think we'll be looking at something at that point in time. To me, that seems like the most logical time to
do that. I don't I think it would be awfully challenging to incorporate uh housing into our designs on in their existing placements uh just because yeah, parking would be a huge huge challenge on the site. I just think we
would probably be trying to push too much into too small of a space. But I do think that down the road there would be some, you know, when we get to that decision point of, you know, what next for the site, um, you know, I think that
would be a possibility. >> So the idea is like building A still needs to be used as part of the swing school situation, but once the swing school usage is over, it doesn't really have a usage and could be replaced with something else >> potentially. Yeah. I mean, I think we
don't know um what the schools might need to do with the space. I mean, there's also the the question of ownership. I believe the site is owned by city schools in this case, which was not the case. That That's correct, right? >> I believe that's correct. >> Yeah, I think that I think that city
schools actually owns this site. Um it's deed to the school board. Um unlike Buford which was deed to the city, we have a weird kind of >> right >> split ownership scenario with all of our school sites. Um so you know I think
that would be a challenge to work through. There would be the the the back end of all that. I'm not the expert on all that. I'll be honest with you. But um yeah, I think down the road I think we are going to find ourselves in a position where you know we've got a good prek center here. You know, I know
there's been some conversation about Luca McGinness, the alternative high school program, and does that expand? So, you know, that's also something we could consider. But yeah, I think I think that would be the kind of moment to say, do we want to
redevelop part of this site in some other way? Uh, or do we want to or do we have educational needs? you know, a lot of our our planning has been driven over the years by um you know, the size of our our classes, our cohort sizes,
right? So, when I first started with the city, we had this emergency. That was when I first met Maria professionally. Um we kind of went to school together, but you know, uh professionally, I met her because she was doing a a capacity study for us, right? because we were in
an emergency because all the schools were about to be bursting at the seams and we needed to figure that out. So, that has trended down to where now that's not a problem really anymore. Some schools still have a little bit of a capacity issue, but not all. Where will we be 16 years from now? I have
absolutely no idea. Maybe we're bursting at the seams again. Maybe where we've shrunk, our cohort sizes have gone down, and now we're kind of figuring out what to do with these sites. And I think that would be a good option at that point. >> I think from a broader perspective of
looking at that, one of the conversations that is an ongoing conversation, I think we've schedule it for some or or looking at it as part of a upcoming meeting would be a conversation around uh housing development opportunities on existing
city-owned sites. Right. Um, in the past the city has done has looked at housing development underwater street parking lots. We we've had conversations about school sites, this school site in particular. There have been other conversations about other sites. And I think
I think there needs to be kind of a broader conversation first about which of these sites would we want to prioritize and try and tackle uh first. And then if if that decision was to go after a school site, I think or or maybe part of that conversation around picking what where to prioritize and where to go
first would need to be a conversation first about what are the the pros and cons on a school site. What are the opportunity costs associated with looking at a school site? what are the what are the issues so that we can understand those fully and then ultimately we would be if we were moving
forward if we were to move forward with the school side I would expect that there would need to be an endorsement from both the council and the school board of that idea and then it kind of moves into a more traditional um public private partnership development
>> process so I think first is kind of looking big picture where do we want to focus our attention in terms making uh publicly owned property available for housing development and within that second looking at this
what are the what are the particular challenges and opportunities that arise on school sites in particular um and then we go from there are my thoughts >> great I appreciate that >> um does >> I have one more question
>> yeah please >> the um so what is the plan with crow is that going to stay open while all this is happening. >> Barring any other input, that's the running plan. Yeah, there there might be temporary shutdowns. Obviously, it if it's being used
>> directly adjacent to a construction site, I can imagine that there might be uh moments, maybe long moments where we have to uh take over their parking lot or something like that in order to move materials in or have lay down space. But we haven't gotten into those logistics
quite yet. But yeah, I think generally speaking, we have no plan to close Crow as part of the project. Um, >> do we have a go nogo for Crow? Do we have a benchmark for Crow? Like if it starts costing us X amount of dollars, we're going to let it go or if it drops
below X usage or anything like that? >> Not as far as I'm aware. I mean, it's kind of a parks question potentially. But um yeah, as far as as far as our portfolio is concerned, you know, in so much as we have maintenance responsibility for Crow, um we will
continue to maintain Crow for as long as it's in the portfolio. >> Thank you. But it's not part of the this >> it is not considered part of I mean we've had some conversations about how crow might play into future programming for but that's kind of way out there
kind of you know if we had a pool available great um I you know there used to be a a walker um school swimming class that took place [clears throat] in pro many many years ago um you know could that sort of thing be reborn I'm
not sure. But yeah, we we have not, you know, we've talked about using Crow as part of some schemes. You, if you've been watching for a while, you'll remember that our expansion scheme for version A back during COVID when we were first talking about it involved taking down Crow and building an addition on
that site. But that would have been a phase two to whatever we're doing at this point. And that would be needed if we decided to expand the uh prek program to something that isn't just uh you know income qualifying and and different
qualifying factors if it was just open to everybody who wanted to put their kids in there. >> Um can you actually talk a little bit more about that? Who was going to go to the prek center >> right now? The same folks who are going to the prek center now. So we this is a
basically a one for one. We're taking the the exact same number and student type and they will inherit this new school. Um, and any conversations that I'm alluding to about changing that, that's way outside. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. What happens to Oaklan now? Do we know? >> We're still in the process with Oakan. John, do you want to speak to that at all? The latest upon thing I can tell you is that I have transmitted a draft of uh co evidence regarding the historic
structures on the property that u I hope can meet our needs and meet the department of historic resources needs as well. I'm waiting for response back from whether UVA and DHR finds that acceptable and then we uh would move forward with hopefully finalizing it
once that once that decision is reached. But it wouldn't have anything to do with the early learning center in any way. >> Pivoted away from that the early learning center site. >> I think the site's challenging for a lot of different reasons and I think we um >> we started to see the delays is just
kind of taking over our program and and you know that the students are already um going to spend a little more time in the temporary condition. So all of these prek students right now are moving into the old Walker upper elementary school. Right. So, the upper upper elementary
students have just vacated. Right now, schools are working along with, you know, Stuart and some folks from our team, some of the maintenance staff to kind of gussy it up and make it nice so that they can use it as a prek center. But it was never meant to be that temporary condition for longer than a
couple of years. So, we started to feel the tension of, you know, how long are we going to wait for this Oaklan situation to play out before we just say, you know what, let's go back to what we were originally talking about. We control that. We own it and we can
move this project forward without concern for or putting a lot of pressure on that on that topic. >> The city and schools are still interested in obtaining the Oakmont site. However, it's just not for this specific project. >> Yeah. and historic covenants are making
it not super usable. >> It makes it a little bit more difficult. Not not unusable, but difficult. >> Um, does anyone else have any additional questions? >> So, are you looking for direction tonight
from city council? And then two, if we don't utilize the sales tax referendum for this or can't, it sounds like at a minimum there would be 15 million dollar additional dollars that we would
need to include in our budget. >> 17. >> Yeah, I think we >> use the 51 number. You're using the 51 number, right? Yeah, that's assuming that we go with option C, which is what we recommend at this point. Um, yeah, I
think that's there would be an additional budget request uh that would go along with that. I think at this point we've come to what we consider and you know, council doesn't have to vote on what direction we take, but we do want you fully aware and to have a
chance to sort of give us feedback. It is costly obviously to continue to go down three different paths at the same time and then to take stacks of drawings and just throw them aside and go down one path. So the sooner we can make the decision, I would recommend we do it now
and go ahead and move down the path C route. But if if there are strong objections to that, I'm happy to hear them. Um, and and we can >> Well, we can't literally do it now because it's not an action item for tonight, but we can take the information that you're telling
us, get it on a future agenda, consider it, ask me follow-up questions before that. What is your um what is your ideal like next steps for timing? >> Um, ideally, I would walk out of here and tell Wick and Maria to pursue option
C and start. And you can give informal guidance as to the council's thinking without having to take a formal vote. You you really don't typically vote on this is the design we're going for this project. It is just but we want to be aligned with council when we do things. So >> I think they are looking for
>> are you y'all looking y'all okay with see problems? That's >> or are we okay with abandoning the B? >> Yes. >> Yes. Well, I'm okay with heading heading forward on C. It sounds like it's a bit of a compromise and there there's some
difficulties with the with B that aren't present with C. And sounds like it's at the moment a reasonable idea. >> And just to confirm, one of the other benefits of C over A is there's still a
gymnasium available. Yeah, which I think was huge for for me personally. I [clears throat] think that we would be it would be poor judgment to remove a gym from the site when we have all of these plans for um you know, swing space
because every elementary school has a gym >> and the kids need somewhere to do the parachute [laughter] thing. >> Yeah. I mean, and and I'll be honest, schools was very agreeable and they said, you know, we can live without it. I said, "Yeah, but this is 16 years
potentially of students who won't have a gym at all during their time here." So, it's one year at a time, of course, but you know, >> [clears throat] >> um they're they're longsuffering, but I think at a certain point, my professional opinion is it's worth $10
million for us to have a gym, which will be useful long into the future. >> And what does the official engagement with the school board look like on this project? What input do they have? What presentations are they getting? How much of this is in >> I presented all of what I just presented
to you last week to school board. Um they I think are willing to tell you that they uh like option C as well. Um I'm seeing some head nodings from some schoolboard members who are in the the
building. Um, so I I think they've received the same information you've received at this point uh as part of our CIP presentation last week. Um, and they will continue to be kept appraised. You know, we do um we do our yearly or
bi-yearly meetings with them where we present all of the entire CIP packet to them. So they'll they'll be kept well aware of what we're planning to do. And were there preschool teachers on the workg group?
>> On the master planning work group >> or the group that helped design C? >> Yes. Yes, there were. >> Yeah, they they've been heavily engaged. >> Yeah. >> In fact, the the new principal of the prek uh was the presentation before me
in school board last week. Well, like likewise, I would be comfortable with you all pursuing scheme C and I would be interested at an upcoming 221 or council work session if just gaming through if we assume we
don't use sales tax referendum money just modeling out what 15 million additional in the budget would look like and how we should start preparing for that just so we're, you know, not caught, you know, flatfooted the
upcoming budget cycle. >> Yeah, I I agree that um a how are we paying for this conversation is worthwhile, but knowing that it's going to be one of these three um leaning towards C makes sense.
>> Excellent. >> Gross. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. That was our only agenda item. >> We have one more. >> We do. We have a round table updates, boards, and committees >> for us to share what we've been up to with each other.
>> Right. >> All right. Nose goes for who starts. >> Oh boy. >> Looks like there's no start. [laughter] [clears throat] >> I didn't understand the concept. >> We can incorporate that in rules
procedure. Exactly. It's in the um >> in the updates that you're working on. >> Okay. Well, don't mind. >> Sure. Uh one board I serve on is the jail board. The main item of business there recently, of course, has been
moving forward with the construction uh renovations. I'm told that things are going along well, but you know, it's it's still fairly early in the process. Um but things appear to be on schedule. No, no terrible problems being
manifested themselves and being manifested along the way. Also serve on the Ryana Water and Sewer Authority board. The issue there primarily has been discussing how how prepared are we
for drought conditions and the answer is pretty we're in pretty good shape unlike places like Gordonville for example that have recently had to at least threaten I'm not sure they actually did have to go on any kind of water rationing but they were basically
one rainstorm away from having to do so. Uh we know Green County has been having a lot of problems with water supply and they may have more problems this year. Charlottesville and Alam Marl will not have that problem. Our uh our um
reservoirs uh even before the rains that came a week or two ago uh were in the 95% full range. the uh the central the the community uh supply community water
supply plan that calls for raising the level of the Ragged Mountain Reservoir and allowing for the possibility of moving water via pipeline from uh Sugar Hollow and South Ryana
uh moving a pipeline up to uh to help fill up the Ragged Mountain reservoir that is that work continues. It won't be completed for another few years. Uh that's separate from the central waterline issue that we've been hearing
a lot about which is work actually in the city. Uh which that also that work is also moving forward. The important point that I I I wanted to [clears throat] talk a little bit about was the fact that uh we have a water
supply a community water supply plan uh going out about the next 40 years and there's an interesting graph that has had to be updated recently that shows on the one hand the steady rise of demand for water and on the other hand a more
jagged kind of stepladder sort of a situation showing going at what our capacity is expected is now is expected to be in the future. Few years ago, it was decided that we would go ahead and implement the full plan uh now rather
than implementing it say 10 years from now. In part because we wanted to make absolutely sure because there was a point in the old old graph it showed about at about 2040 the two lines begin to get perilously close to one another
where suddenly it looks like the supply is not is not increasing until we did certain other work meanwhile the demand was continuing. So by doing the that work ahead of time, we keep well ahead of of the curve and I think we'll we'll
be in good shape for the future. One of the other interesting data points I asked in one of the meetings uh whether the counties adding the Astroenica project was going to make a sign significant difference in water demand. They said yes. They thought it could add
up to about a million gallons a day in water demand to the roughly 10 to 11 million million gallons uh that we're dealing with now. And presumably every additional if they were to get another Astroenica plant to come that could add
another million gallons. And so one of the other pieces of this of doing the the whole water supply plan now is to keep ahead not only of the current uses but also the uses that might be incurred
by adding additional additional industry to the county. The county says they would like to add additional industry to the county. It's nice to know that there is at least some room within the system to allow that to happen without being an adverse situation for the rest of us.
Um, also on the Ryana Sewer Solid Waste Authority Board, uh, the main interesting point there, I thought, was that the, uh, the recycling centers were now adding an ability to dispose of lithium batteries safely. Uh, that had
been, uh, something that was important. I think it's only out at the Ivy uh, landfill collection center, but I'm not not 100% positive of that. And the other board that I serve on u that's been meeting recently is the historic resources committee where uh
[clears throat] an interesting issue has has arisen. You may be aware that we have a a replica of the Liberty Bell at the fire department and the fire department wants to move the replica of the Liberty Bell because it's in the way
of certain expansion program programs that they've got. question is where do they move it to? I think they're what they're really saying is move it off of our property, not just move it to a different corner of our property. And so the we've had to do a little research
and it turns out that the the Liberty Bell replica was given to the city in 1950 and it was one replica was given to each state and the Virginia version of the Liberty Bell was given to
Montichello. Why was it given to Montichello? Who knows? uh it has no little no logical connection but there there it goes and so at some point Montichello said you know we really don't have a reason for
it to be here and so they gave it again nobody's entirely sure of how it came to be given to the volunteer fire company that was serving Charlottesville at that point and then when the the professional firefighters took over they took over
the Liberty Bell also but they don't really have anything to do with it. And so question is, is there some other place it might go where it might get some some historic resource treatment? And that's all it's all something we're
trying to figure out. But along the way, we discover that we don't actually know who owns the bell. So to be continued. >> And that's not the bell. I might be getting this wrong. That was in the courthouse, >> right? It is the bell that it's the bell
that is sitting right now outside the Ridge Street Fire Station. >> Oh, no. >> Yeah, it's it is a a duplicate or a replica of the Liberty Bell minus the crack. >> I can rec my statue research if if need be.
>> I mean, is that something we can deal with in time for the summer? >> No. >> [laughter] >> We could just add it to like the tour booklet. >> So, those are the things that my various committees have been working on. >> Any questions? We could use it at Loop
Deville as the finishing gong. That would be great. >> It turns out somebody actually made a gong >> um on um I think it was in Seville tomorrow or one of the things I was reading online that somebody's doing an article on it and they said, "Does this actually ring?" And so they they made
the clapper ring it and it it it does in fact ring. So >> cool. >> Very great. Thanks for the recap. Who would like to go next? >> Sure. [laughter] Let's hear it. >> Um try to run through them quick. Um >> you got time. >> Um
LEAP. Um they've been in, you know, a bit of a challenging state for a while because they had a lot of plans that relied on bipartisan infrastructure law um funding sources that the Trump administration's cut. But they continue to do their kind of core mission of energy efficiency
work, but have been looking for how can they kind of find new areas of expansion in light of those cuts. um our request for them to be funded in the state budget as part of the um energy resource hub did make it into the draft state
budget. Hopefully that you know ultimately passes. um our recent decision on carbon offsets could also be an opportunity for them to take on that local um energy efficiency work and it may not be LEAP but that does it
but also opportunities at the airport for community solar um as they do their expansion whether that be rooftop solar or um solar in their parking lot area or solar in unused spaces. um housing advisory committee. Um they've looked at
the report that was done about the city's um staffing levels in our housing department that recommended several new staff positions. Um and they have endorsed those recommendations and have been exploring um they want to make an ask of city council to at a work session
just walk through those recommendations and hear feedback from city council about the need for those new housing um staffing positions in order to implement all of our housing goals. In their work plan, they're also looking to prioritize um work around new policies related to
tenant rights and anti-displacement. the housing authority um also dealing with kind of challenges around federal funding being reduced and beyond that one of their biggest challenges is just the amount of nonpayment of rent which
has significantly impacted the financial sustainability of properties. Um and they've been they've implemented a new anti-eviction um policy to try to really intensively work with residents who are behind on rent to get them on payment plans,
figure out what is the source of non-payment of rent. Um but that at work session tomorrow is going to get further discussion. Um but again, we'll just highlight that non-payment of rent is becoming an increasingly large issue as it is also been for Pedmont Housing Alliance um regional housing
partnership. They had a recent presentation around funding beyond the litec for funding affordable housing. Um I think one of the interesting things they looked at was revolving loan funds either for um
affordable housing to buy down LITC affordability or if that could help for kind of missing middle workforce housing for things like duplexes, triplexes that maybe the market is not building because they can't get affordable enough capital. Um and they looked at other localities which have done it and looked
at maybe for our region maybe a $10 million um seed money could be sufficient for a revolving loan fund in Charlottesville that would be effective. They're also working on their regional new regional housing needs assessment which they hope will be um
sustainable in terms of staff at all the surrounding localities would be able to kind of plug in new data as it comes in and rely on it so it's not just like a one-time report. um Kindlewood Advisory Committee. They've just begun planning for phase four of Kendallwood. Um very
early stages of the community design process, but it's their tightest location in terms of sites and there's easement challenges, challenges with the mature trees that are there. Um but they're diving into how do they want to design that and get the required number of units on site. Um they're also
discussing, they know for a fact they want community land trust home ownership opportunities there. um but are also exploring will one of the buildings be for um residents specifically um Ryana River Basin Commission they're planning for their annual conference which will
probably be in September in the fall um but that's always a very interesting conference that's very public policy focused um if anyone is interested and um they're also looking at what would it look like for implementation of the Ryana River corridor plan and really looking at Alamoral County's free bridge
prominade potentially being a catalyst project that maybe could spur the city to think about really making that something like a river arts district or something that's more activated and also kind of highlighting a lot of the really interesting indigenous and black history that is along the Ryana River corridor.
Um finance committee discussed participatory budgeting which we had at a recent work session very kind of high level conversations around starting in July we'll have the authority to a land value tax. So is that something the city would ever want to explore? And then at our most recent finance committee
meeting, we kind of just very high level started to brainstorm what could potential uses of the one-time affordable housing payments that will be coming into the city from the Verve and 2117 Ivy Road projects be. And that'll be a little bit more than $10 million
total. That probably sometime next year will come to the city as one-time funds. Um and Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission. Um we they're working on a this is far way away but they're working on a regional land bank study that was evaluating could it be
done whether if it's just Charlottville and Almor together or maybe are there localities beyond Charlesville and Almor who'd want to join one and is there potential for that there um but that's probably at least a year away until they complete um that initial study and other than that probably their most important
work is really just their coordination with subcommittees of MO regional housing partnership Carta. Um, and that's that is it for me. >> Did you say the solar at CHO is being led by the discovery has been led by
LEAP or that's a CHO project that leaps participating in? Sorry, I missed. >> So, they're they're not participating anything yet. In the past, they've just brainstormed is there an opportunity at CHO and they've just kind of explored maybe even LEAP is not the right partner, maybe it's community solar through a different mechanism, but
they've just looked at that because um CHO is going to be going through an expansion soon and right now they haven't incorporated any community solar as part of it. >> Uh >> even if it's just rooftop solar. And then [snorts] with CR CRA, is there a sense or does it ever discuss in those
meetings about like how much um Noah how many properties they have to that are naturally occurring that are becoming that are coming online or that are in the process of that? Is there any kind of like inventory or
audit of that or are they looking at that now or are they kind of tied down with the other stuff that you were mentioning? So, to my knowledge, they don't have like a systemized list of naturally occurring affordable housing in the city that they're targeting to buy. Um, I think they're still kind of opportunistic about looking at
properties that go up for sale and they're definitely still interested in purchasing properties on the market. Um, but their biggest focus is with the Dogwood housing portfolio, um, which has a lot of deferred maintenance needs, um, that they know they're going to need to do some rooftop replacements and
renovations of some of those units. So, I don't know if that answers your question. >> No, it does. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's helpful. Thank you. I didn't know if they had a chunk in the portfolio already that they were sitting on and they couldn't move on or if there were So, that helps. >> Yeah. Mo most of the properties they purchase they're using in some way, but
I think there are a few that the maintenance issues are large enough that they kind of they can't really pair them with vouchers or other things. >> Ah, okay, that makes sense. Okay, thanks. In case them me. So, the only two that I sit on that I don't sit on with you all
in other some other form fashion are the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, which um I'm on a the most active piece of that board is I'm on a subcommittee um that's called research and prioritize. So, we're
looking right now on evidence-based practices to kind of bridge the gap between um what they call sequential intercepts that um prevent recidivism
um or improve um the quality of life for incarcerated folks before and after and during. And so, we are looking at that regionally. um and starting to kind of craft a plan
to figure out um what other what gaps are most prevalent amongst the region itself. There are some where all of our um we have some high gap percentages and some of those like 77 to 100% of all um of the municipalities in our footprint
um have that gap. So, we're going to try and prioritize those and um become kind of the trusted broker of information about best practices to to tackle those gaps and and um frame those recommendations constructively and um
customize them for the for each municipality so that um they can maybe achieve and close that gap. So, that work is going on and and pretty exciting. Um and then the other one is the social services um advisory board which is really more of a kind of report
out board but we've been hearing from um folks who are taking care of foster families and foster care systems and the impacts of the current administration and funding on basically the entire ecosystem of social services. And we
have a lot of needs there. And um some really skilled staff working with the resources they have to um work all of the the entire spectrum of foster care from pre prevention um into
placement and then exiting foster care. Um but it's a really heavy load and so there's still a lot of work to be done. um and they're looking at different ways to kind of staff and um prioritize their
work in in other areas as well. Um all the different arms of social services. So I'm learning about those as we go. Um but the other ones I'll leave to you that are I'm also on. So you can do card and >> yeah miss anything please let me know. >> Okay. Um, so I'm backing up a little
bit. Um, I'm also going to talk about some of the field trips that I went on. Um, starting with uh, NACTO, um, the city transportation um, official conference in Minneapolis. I went to along with our city engineer
um, and our transit planner. And that was a multi-day conference where we learned a lot about basically anything cool about roads, transit, um, transportation. Um, the city of Minneapolis, I've said
it before in various meetings. I'll reiterate it. In 2015, they made a goal that by 2030 60% of trips would be not by car. Um, and this is a city that has to deal with pretty significant winters.
So they've done um a they've invested a lot in um bikeways, greenways um and their transit network. So it was really great to explore that. The conference travels every year. So each city that it goes to is highlighting a different feature. So it was really great to see
that. Um and then there were uh professionals from all over the world that were there to present on um projects and strategies for funding, for design um and kind of share knowledge as well as an opportunity for us to
participate in some public works projects and also see at the trade show portion a variety of different options for like protecting bike lanes or doing raised crosswalks or bus um floating bus platform. platforms, that sort of thing.
So, that was an excellent experience. Um, really thankful that I got to go to that and to the city of Minneapolis for hosting such a great, um, experience. Um, then, uh, we did an ebike demo with the county at the county office building
as part of bike month and had 29 people, uh, at least sign the waiver to take a bike out, which is great. It was just a little afterwork thing trying to catch people as they were leaving the county office building. the bike shops were here. Um and some city reps were there as well. Uh that was great. Um and then
our planning and development work group of we met two times so far. Um the first one set up the agenda some future scoping topics talking about um inclusionary zoning and then the opportunity sites that u Mr. freeze mentioned throughout the city uh where
there could be we talked about working on coming up with a plan to identify those. Um then in the next meeting we talked about uh Stribbling Avenue, the sidewalk and the traffic calming opportunities there. Um that led to another con conversation
about um maybe picking a street in town to do a wounderf demonstration project which is a Dutch word that is a uh a street that all modes can travel down but it doesn't prioritize u motor cars as the primary um
vehicle. So it's it's meant to be to be safe and feel safe for bikers, pedestrians, kids to play, that sort of thing. Um, and we talked about long and short-term CAT uh, climate goals based on the federal funding challenges that
you've already mentioned. Um, and how we can think smart about how to spend our money there. Um, then I went to Chapel Hill with um, several members of our city staff and the mayor uh, to meet
with this was facilitated by the Chamber of Commerce. Um we met with a bunch of counterparts down there. Uh similarly sharing their strategies for things for homelessness um relationships with the university
and got to explore their development projects. We went to their habitat site that's their version of Southwood essentially. They're going to come visit us in September. So it was great to start building those relationships. um they've done a couple of those trips, but we were the first ones to go to them. And this will be our first time
hosting something like this, at least in a while, to my knowledge. >> First time in anywhere. >> Yeah. First time for for us, at least who are up here now. Uh so we're looking forward to hosting them in September. Um, and then we had a Carter meeting
while I was down there talking about a priorit prioritization study um, for transit basically the the balance between intensity and footprint meaning do you spend your money on frequency or expansion and how
we want to move forward. Um, interestingly in this study, um, the the connect, uh, uh, service to Buckingham scored very high as something to work on expanding. So, we talked a lot about why
that would be, um, and whether or not the wrership metrics are accurately reflecting the um, the the lived experience for folks. So, we're going to keep delving into that. Um, and then there were some questions about the accuracy of the plans for the
route adjustments noted in the presentation, whether or not they were confirmed or in the right place. And so we'll we'll also pay attention to that as we move forward. Um, councelor Flecher and I attended the Roseville Neighborhood Association meeting where we had a great discussion, really great
discussion um with the um the neighbors there about um what development looks like and how it affects cities and neighborhoods and um both in terms of look and feel but also bottom line. So I
thought that was a really really great experience. Um [clears throat] then there was the bike and pedestrian advisory committee where uh Jim Keller from uh the utilities senior project manager presented on the West Main Street gas and water replacement project.
Uh city engineer Brennan Duncan presented on the STAR study for the West Main and Ridge Street intersection. And um also speaking of Rose Hill, um our transit planner Zoe uh also noted um that there was significant community feedback on the Rose Hill um restriping,
repaving, reconfiguring project. She's led um a walking group there and is really collecting a lot of great input from the community. So it's not just something the city is doing, but the neighborhood is involved in that. and connect Seville is updating
that as um feedback is received and decisions are made. So that's a great resource for anyone who wants to know what's up with that. Um then we had another Carter meeting, a special uh meeting because we weren't able to fit everything in for the first one where we
welcomed representatives from uh CBTA and DRPT, the Central Virginia Transportation Authority and the Department of Rail and Public Transportation. Um both of those have the word transportation as their T where AR Carta
is just transit. Um so CBTA is their transportation authority that covers not just buses but also um uh the roads and greenways and everything for the the
Richmond and surrounding area regions. We're looking to them to to as on Carter. We're looking to them and other transit and transportation authorities in the state to um kind of figure out what's the best way for us to model our governance, our funding and that sort of
thing. Um but if we get Carta funded, we have to appeal to the general assembly for that. Of course, it will be the first transit um regional transit agency that's funded in the Commonwealth. So, we're trying to learn from those around us, but also
kind of breaking the mold a little bit. Um then the presentation from DRPT was a little bit educational. Um DRPT split from VOTE in the early 90s. It's we are one of the only states where our transit department is different from the
um Department of Transportation. Um they provide state and federal funding, capital and operating grants and studies plans and technical assistance for um localities who are trying to do things with their transit transportation networks. And they have a new um leader,
Maria Zimmerman, who was at our meeting which was great. she came to to visit us and answer questions and um uh also told us that she said a really heartening thing which was that transit only works as good as the land use
around it. Um which is an important thing to remember. Transit is at a certain point unscalable. Car use at a certain point is unscalable. We only have so much land and space and there's an expense needed when you have to extend it further and further. And
so, uh, the land use around it is better housing decisions. And so, uh, the DRPT group is going to do a transit oriented housing development study, which is a little out of their usual, um, uh,
purview because it's about housing and not how to get people around, but proximity is the answer to both of those things. So, it it >> they relate so closely that it is kind of in their their realm. Um, so that's going to be really exciting to hear more about as it happens later this year. Um,
then last weekend there was another ebike demo with the Velmont Carlton Neighborhood Association um, which was also really fun. Um, the weather was a little warm, but it was nice to be on a bike. And then um yesterday uh the
Charlottesville scholarship um board I was not able to make the meeting unfortunately but um in the notes they were talking about the fundraising strategy, the 90-day review of the new program manager position. In all the meetings I've been with them that's been um working out well. And if anyone would
like to donate to the Charlottesville scholarship program, please head to the website. It offers uh scholarships to um not just city school students, but also um certain adults looking to get additional credentiing or go back to
school. So, it's a good um it's a good resource for the community and we want to make sure that it's successful and does not go through the endowment. Um any questions about that? >> No, thank you. >> Okay, that's great. It was a busy month. Mhm.
>> Um, anything else from the staff? >> No, I don't think so. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Move we journ. >> Do a second. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. Thanks everybody.